From sentto-44114-1883-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Sun Jan 30 15:13:16 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: shoulson-kli@meson.org Received: (qmail 6782 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2000 15:13:14 -0000 Received: from zash.lupine.org (205.186.156.18) by pi.meson.org with SMTP; 30 Jan 2000 15:13:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 10398 invoked by uid 40001); 30 Jan 2000 15:14:49 -0000 Delivered-To: kli-mark@kli.org Received: (qmail 10395 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2000 15:14:48 -0000 Received: from c3.egroups.com (208.48.218.20) by zash.lupine.org with SMTP; 30 Jan 2000 15:14:48 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-1883-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Received: from [10.1.10.36] by c3.egroups.com with NNFMP; 30 Jan 2000 15:14:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 27866 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2000 15:14:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by 10.1.10.36 with QMQP; 30 Jan 2000 15:14:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nickel.cix.co.uk) (194.153.0.18) by 10.1.10.27 with SMTP; 30 Jan 2000 15:14:45 -0000 Received: from solipsys.compulink.co.uk (solipsys.compulink.co.uk [194.153.10.165]) by nickel.cix.co.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA21053 for ; Sun, 30 Jan 2000 15:14:41 GMT X-Envelope-From: C.D.Wright@solipsys.compulink.co.uk Message-Id: <200001301514.PAA21053@nickel.cix.co.uk> Comments: Authenticated sender is To: lojban@onelist.com Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.31) MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@onelist.com; contact lojban-owner@onelist.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@onelist.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2000 15:15:11 +0000 From: C.D.Wright@solipsys.compulink.co.uk Subject: RE: [lojban] Subjunctive? Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: C.D.Wright@solipsys.compulink.co.uk > C.D. Wright (though Outlook claims it is from Pycyn): I replied to a message but, of course, it went to Pycyn. I hadn't kept a copy, so I asked Pycyn either to forward it to the list, or to send it back to me so I could post it. The former was chosen. Sorry for any confusion. Anyway, the point of my posting was obviously lost, so let me try to make it painfully obvious at the risk of belabourng what some of you already know, but no-one seems to be talking about ... The subjunctive carries two pieces of information. The most obvious is the causal if-then: If I were to use my car to go to work then it would be more expensive. This first point is the usual TFTT, although in English some sort of causal connection is usually assumed, and this seems to be the point that people are discussing. The second, however, is the speaker's belief that the first part, the antecedent, is not true, and unlikely ever to be true. People are discussing at length the different attempts at expresing the causal (or whatever) connection, but perhaps the original question was really about this extra item of information carried in the subjunctive. Otherwise it's not actually a subjective. So the English subjunctive form is a succinct way of saying: Granted, A is not true and is unlikely ever to be true, but if it *were* true, <--- "were" = subjunctive then B would be forced to follow. cdw -- \\// ze'uku ko jmive gi'e snada --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ---------------------------- Looking for the lowest refinance rate for your mortgage? GetSmart.com can help. We'll help you find the loan you need - quick, easy, and FREE click Click Here ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com